Need advice on small, inexpensive dv camera

Tanjy wrote on 4/20/2002, 4:49 PM

A few postings back I mentioned my problems with the ADVC-100 and it sounds like I have a defective unit.

Instead of exchanging it for another unit I was thinking of just returning it and buying a small dv camera with good analog input. That way I'll have ADVC-100 like funtionality plus a second camera which I can always use -- all for just a couple of hundred $$$ more. (The ADVC-100 goes for about $300.)

Can anybody recommend a good small camera in the $600 range? I know nothing about analog input into a camera since I have an older DV model that doesn't do that sort of thing. But I assume that the input quality would be good and probably better than the ADVC. Am I correct? Is this the best way to go?

Comments

BD wrote on 4/22/2002, 10:03 AM

tanjv, you can check the features and prices of many camcorders at www.bhphoto.com -- look for the analog-input feature. You might want to select a model that can use the same batteries and other accessories as your existing camcorder.

Two camcorders is a good idea. You can leave one hooked up to your computer for inputting & outputting DV tapes. The Canopus device is an excellent converter, but it can't play tapes.

johnmeyer wrote on 4/22/2002, 1:06 PM

The cheapest camera I know of that has analog in is the Canon ZR40. The older ZR10 has analog-in, but cannot pass the analog through to the computer without first recording on tape. The ZR-40, according to the brochure, apparently has analog pass-through. B&H sells it for $569.95 (www.bhphoto.com)

http://www03.bhphotovideo.com/default.sph/FrameWork.class?FNC=ProductActivator__Aproductlist_html___247282___CAZR40J___REG___CatID=1871___SID=ED967170C10___call=features#goto_features

I have a Sony TRV-11 which I constantly use to capture analog video directly into my computer. The newer Sony cameras in the TRV series also have analog capture and analog pass-through. These Sony cameras are not as small as the Canon models, however, and like everything else from Sony, cost about 50% more than the competition (but have better features).

Tanjy wrote on 4/22/2002, 9:31 PM

I'm seriously considering getting the Canon ZR40 or 45. However, I've been reading a lot about the Sony TRV17 which is more expensive but has gotten rave reviews from users. It's supposed to be outstanding under lowlight conditions.

Anyone know how much of a difference in picture quality there is between the Canon ZR series and the Sony TRV17? If it's not huge then I'll go with the Canon.

johnmeyer wrote on 4/23/2002, 12:25 AM

If you've got the money, go with the Sony. Faster zoom, better autofocus, just to name two reasons.

bonze10 wrote on 4/23/2002, 11:48 AM

I just recently purchased a factory refurbished unit off ebay for $400. A Sharp mini dv, model VL-WD250U. And now the next model up is available as well for about the same price. It has the analog inputs which I've found very useful. Its a pretty nice camera too for the price. I wasn't too thrilled about the factory refurbished part, but when I received it, I wuz very happy. It wasn't any different than receiving a brand new model. The only feature I would like to have, that this one does not, is shooting in widescreen. :( Other than that, I'm very happy, and may buy another in the near future for our movie projects!